Nuclear strategy

The whole theory of nuclear strategy is based on the idea that humans are rational.  “Mutually assured destruction,” or MAD, means that if an enemy launches a nuclear attack, that enemy will be destroyed even if the target country is destroyed as well.  In other words, a nuclear attack is suicidal.

A missile defense system probably won’t work, since even if only one percent of the warheads made it through a defensive shield, given the TNT equivalent of nukes today, the price would still be horrendous and could result in the death of humans in the nuclear winter that would follow.  

You can see problems.  What happens if there is an accident, like 1983, when a command center near Moscow received data that the U.S. had launched a nuclear attack?  In that case the Russian in charge of the center (his name was Co. Stanislav Petrov) decided it was probably a false alarm and didn’t report it.  Suppose he had?

Or what happens if the U.S. President is a madman.  When Trump was elected, Nancy Pelosi wanted congress to pass legislation that more than one person would be necessary to launch a nuclear attack.  Right now Biden, by himself, could do that.  And if Trump is elected to a second term, he could also do that.  The legislation was never adopted.  

The movie “Oppenheimer” has made many of us rethink the whole issue of nuclear strategy and what could go wrong.  It seems to me this issue of who decides is important and deserves some serious consideration.

I learned about Col. Petrov in an article by Sarah Scoles, “Rethinking the Unthinkable,” New York Times, (Aug. 22, 2023), p. D1, D5.